It follows a consultation ahead of the ballot which will decide the future of the unpopular scheme.

Hundreds of firms refusing to pay the levy have been hauled before the courts.

Protesters say they have been forced to pay an average £500 on top of business rates for a scheme only a sixth of firms voted to set up in the first place three years ago.

Rebels protested technical hold-ups meant most hadn’t received unwanted key services they were forced to pay for – including CCTV and broadband.

Dissenting firms kicked out most BID company directors last September in a vote to form a new board.

They have set about moves towards a new vote of all levypayers on whether they want to scrap the scheme.

It led to Ms Millett and Ms Bennett resigning from the board.

They are now protesting that levypaying firms are not being properly informed ahead of the vote, particularly about whether a levy will be needed again this year to pay for winding-up costs, and what will happen with the minority of BID companies who’ve received the CCTV and broadband.

In a letter to levypayers, they also accused the new board of breaking previous promises by “narrowing the options” available during the consultation – to either voting to scrap, or keep the scheme in its existing form, rather than reforming it.

Indications so far are that 80 per cent of firms indicating voting intentions want the scheme scrapped.

Ms Bennett and Ms Millett said: “We do not in any way wish to influence the outcome of any decision but feel members need to know the full facts.”

But John Scott, a new director of the non-profit BID company, called Coventry Best for Business, said the board was committed to fully informing levypayers, and two public meetings had started that process.

As the Telegraph has reported, the board does anticipate an additional levy this year to pay for any wind-up costs.

And he said BID legislation required the BID board to ask a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer on forthcoming ballot forms, not multiple-choices.

Mr Robinson, Labour MP for Coventry North-west said: “The Chamber and CV One have financial interests in retaining the BID.

"Their statements are unreasonably seeking to discredit the board and the democratic process.”